Collaborations that facilitate the
scholarship of teaching:
Working with education professionals
and more!
Ann C. Smith
Jennifer Hayes-Klosteridis
Paulette Robinson
University of Maryland
College Park MD
ASM Division W, Washington D.C. 2003
Knowing what works
How People Learn (2000) Bransford, Brown
and Cocking eds
• Active learning strategies
– Allowing students to become involved and take
control of their own learning
Showing what works
• What are the best methods to employ?
• What strategies will be required to
implement the methods.
• How can success be assessed?
Active learning – our goal
• Variety of strategies
–
–
–
–
–
Involve student participation
Give context to content
Discussion
Writing
Group work
• Problem based, Inquiry based, Case based
Instructor
Challenges:
Large enrollment, diverse backgrounds, complex, content rich subject
BSCI223 General Microbiology
• Pre- requisite: One course in General
Biology
• Student population: Science students
– Including biology, microbiology, soil science,
kinesiology, psychology
• Large Lecture- 250 students
• Laboratory component
Solution:
Enlarge the Instructor Base
Establish a teaching team
•Other Science Faculty
•Education Faculty
•Graduate Teaching Assistants
•Undergraduate Teaching Assistants
Collaborations enlarge the instructor base
Teaching Team – Science Faculty
• Faculty instructors
–
–
–
–
Ann Smith – Instructor
Patty Shields - Instructor
Richard Stewart & Jon Dinman – Associate Professors
Robert Yuan – Full Professor
• All PhD microbiologists each providing unique
perspective to the team
– Time spent with students, awareness of needs of our
Undergraduates, Current Research topics, Global
perspective of Science,
Teaching Team: Education
Professionals
Jennifer Hayes-Klosteridis
– Masters degree in Biology
– Ph.D candidate Education Policy, Planning and
Leadership, UM College of Education
• Paulette Robinson
– Ph.D. Education Policy, Planning and Leadership
– Manager, Teaching Learning Support, OIT, UM
• Provide education perspective, knowledge of
learning theory, and teaching methods, experience
in education research.
Teaching Team: Graduate Assistants
• Life Sciences graduate students
– Knowledge of the field
– Experiences as a student,
– Liaison with students
Teaching Team: UTA
• Undergraduate Teaching Assistants
– Alumni of the course
– Enroll for elective credit
• Undergraduate Technology Apprentice
Program
– Trained in technology
– Knowledge of behind the scenes
Benefits of Collaboration
 We can do more, Learn from each other
• Students become teaching “apprentices”
• Education professionals can ask questions about
application of education theory to the discipline
• OIT professionals can ask questions about the use of
technology by faculty and students.
• Science Faculty can ask questions about methods that
facilitate the education of future scientists, or best
attract students to the study of science.
 Our teaching has evolved to scholarship
Costs of Collaboration
• Costs
– No monetary cost
• Lab fees, University and Department grants –
technology and travel.
• Goal was to use existing resources
– Faculty/TA’s have to relinquish some control
– Need for time to co-ordinate/meet discuss
Communication
• Add technology
Goal: Active Learning in a Large
Enrollment Microbiology Class
Approach
• Establish a teaching team where members
work collaboratively to design, implement,
and assess active learning strategies
• Use technology to establish an on-line
learning center to provide a site/time for
communication, organization, and active
learning options
Course Surveys
Grades
Small group On-line discussion of complex topics
Discussion area for general questions
Course Syllabus/Information/Announcements
Case studies
Links to Resources
Lecture outlines and
power points
PAK discussion
questions
Links to databases
Virtual poster session
On-line Lab Manual -pdf
Learning Center On-line exam
Time
Access
Communication Organization
Active Learning
LECTURE
Directed Discussions
Question/Answer
Lectures linked to labs/cases
250 students/instructor
Lab Review
quizzes
Presentations
Lab reports
Labs linked to lectures/cases
LAB
18 students/TA
Mean Response
Results from UM General
Education Course survey
Participate Actively in Learning,
Significant increase since 1993
review and All LL reviewed over
time
Qualitative Analysis – Have we
engaged students in active learning?
• Constructed surveys
– Delivered within WebCT
• Analysis of responses looking at themes
What did you like
about the on-line
discussion?
What did you
learn from
Case Study
questions?
What did
you like
about the use
of
technology?
Comment (350 students)
Example
Number
Negative response
I Don’t like Web Ct
7
Negative response
Live off campus, difficult to
down load or view pages
2
Access and organization of
information
24 hour access to everything!
152
Convenient, easy to use
Convenient to have everything
32
Options to communicate with
students and course instructors
A direct link to professors and
students if I had a problem
58
On -line quizzes,
I owe my fabulous lab practical
grade to
80
Lecture outlines
The best way to learn – allowed
me to review
85
Grades
Great way to know what my
current grade is.
59
Lab manual
Saved money in not having to
buy a lab manual
25
Positive Responses:
Support
Dept of Cell
Biology/Molecular
Genetics
College of Life
Sciences
Teaching
Team
NCCS
Undergraduate
Studies
Center for
Teaching
Excellence
Office of
Information
Technology
PKAL
ASM
Students
Questions?
Questions?
350 Students Surveyed
What do you like about the on-line discussion?
– 79 the opportunity to discuss with students! “so many
different ideas and tangents to explore and learn about”
– 30 liked that they learned new information
– Additional comments about the positive aspects about
working in a group, meeting new people and being
online provided flexibility in space and time